This article is based on a lecture given by the author at the forum held by the China Academy of Art "Century: A Proposal," Strasbourg, France, 2017.12.02

I have chosen to begin this series of upcoming speeches with October 1917. I have chosen this date not because we are commemorating its centennial, but because it initiates what I call a great revolution, meaning a revolution that still remains unachieved. There have not been so many great evolutions throughout history. There have been three.

The first was the French Revolution. And it is no coincidence that this gave birth to the first socialist revolution, the Paris Commune (1871). The second was the Russian Revolution; and the third, the Chinese Revolution.

These were great revolutions because their projects went far beyond the requisites of their time. They gave rise to projects that, in a certain way, can be described as utopian. Indeed, but these were creative utopias, those that make history. Today's utopia becomes tomorrow's reality.

They need time to develop, to enable the processes they initiate to contribute to history. Only great evolutions make history. Conservative reactions, or those that are frankly reactionary, merely slow down their movement, nothing more. I am optimistic... I believe that these revolutions will finally have the upper hand.

The French Revolution, not that of 1789, which was its February Revolution, but that of 1793, which was its October Revolution, initiated modern democracy and modern politics, which would unfold throughout the 19th century, the 20th century and certainly even beyond. It initiated such politics on the basis of a new principle. It set about the hard task of reconciling two values that are not complementary with each other: liberty and equality. This was contrary to the so-called American Revolution, which saw liberty as opposed to equality. The principle of competition promoted by the American Revolution effectively sees liberty as the liberty of a few, to the detriment of the majority, victims of inequality. The greatness of the French Revolution may be a coincidence, the choice of Strasbourg for holding our meeting was an excellent one… Because it was here that Rouget de Lisle composed the beautiful hymn “La Marseillaise.”

The Russian Revolution of October 1917 was also a great revolution because it proposed the setting up of the International Front of Workers: “Workers of the world, unite!” This revolution vouches for the fact that this was possible, although not immediately, at least soon. As Lenin said, the revolution that started in Russia, described as the “weak link” in the system of that era, was to be followed within a short historical period by revolutions throughout Europe, especially in Germany. It was not by chance that this did not happen, since the proletarian internationalism was not yet on the agenda of the immediate future. It nonetheless remained necessary and possible in the future.

The Chinese Revolution was also a great revolution because it proposed to associate national liberation from imperialist domination with radical social transformation capable of bringing together all the peoples of what are now called the countries of the South, meaning those of Asia, Africa and Latin America. The Chinese Revolution was indeed followed by the beginning of the renaissance of the peoples of the South. I am referring here to the Bandung Conference (1955) and the Non-Aligned Movement that followed. This was, however, only a limited and fragile beginning. Associating liberation from the yoke of imperialism with the determined commitment to the road of socialist construction has not yet been understood as an unavoidable necessity.

Such are the reasons for these three revolutions being great revolutions. It was because they were ahead of their time that the Russian and Chinese revolutions were immediately confronted with two huge challenges.

The first of these challenges has been the continual bellicose and barbarous hostility of the so-called civilized West, meaning the ruling classes of the capitalist and imperialist West. For the Cold War was not a late phenomenon coming after the Second World War. Hot and Cold Wars against the Soviet Union have never ceased from 1917 to the present day: the 1917–1920 wars of intervention, the first long cold war up to 1941, the second hot war—the Second World War, and then the renewal of the cold war that followed. The Soviets have faced this challenge with the adoption of accelerated industrial construction and armament. I believe we should be grateful to them, as it was because of the Red Army that the Nazis were defeated.

China found itself in a situation enabling the country to face up to the same challenge, that of hostile imperialism, but in a different way. It has chosen the path of active participation in globalization, and in this context, has implemented systematic policies with a view to transforming this globalization, which by its very nature is capitalist and imperialist, into a new form of “globalization without hegemony.” We will surely discuss this in our debates.

The second challenge the two great revolutions have been confronted with is that of engaging upon the social transformation of the overwhelming majority of rural dwellers. The question is how to associate this rural majority with a revolution that is not a bourgeois democratic revolution but a people's democratic revolution, which is very different. The challenge is to associate them in a transformation that enables progress in the construction of unity among workers from all over the world, and unity among all peoples in the world.

I will conclude on this note. Since we are invited to propose a Manifesto for the twenty-first century, I suggest that our objective should be the setting up of a peoples' and workers' Internationale. This is what we need. For this, we must go beyond the formulas inaugurated under the name of “social forums,” which are merely spaces for debate. Although useful, these are not enough. Beyond this, it is necessary to initiate forms of organization that enable workers and peoples from all over the planet to coordinate their striving strategies for struggle, to move on from defensive strategies, leaving the initiative to the dominant imperialist and capitalist power, to an offensive strategy that would force the opponent to be on the defensive and to respond to our initiatives, those of the workers and peoples.

While this call may seem utopian today, and it undoubtedly will, it should become a reality quite soon.

This article is based on a lecture given by the author at the forum held by the China Academy of Art "Century: A Proposal," Strasbourg, France, 2017.12.02

I have chosen to begin this series of upcoming speeches with October 1917. I have chosen this date not because we are commemorating its centennial, but because it initiates what I call a great revolution, meaning a revolution that still remains unachieved. There have not been so many great evolutions throughout history. There have been three.

The first was the French Revolution. And it is no coincidence that this gave birth to the first socialist revolution, the Paris Commune (1871). The second was the Russian Revolution; and the third, the Chinese Revolution.

These were great revolutions because their projects went far beyond the requisites of their time. They gave rise to projects that, in a certain way, can be described as utopian. Indeed, but these were creative utopias, those that make history. Today's utopia becomes tomorrow's reality.

They need time to develop, to enable the processes they initiate to contribute to history. Only great evolutions make history. Conservative reactions, or those that are frankly reactionary, merely slow down their movement, nothing more. I am optimistic... I believe that these revolutions will finally have the upper hand.

The French Revolution, not that of 1789, which was its February Revolution, but that of 1793, which was its October Revolution, initiated modern democracy and modern politics, which would unfold throughout the 19th century, the 20th century and certainly even beyond. It initiated such politics on the basis of a new principle. It set about the hard task of reconciling two values that are not complementary with each other: liberty and equality. This was contrary to the so-called American Revolution, which saw liberty as opposed to equality. The principle of competition promoted by the American Revolution effectively sees liberty as the liberty of a few, to the detriment of the majority, victims of inequality. The greatness of the French Revolution may be a coincidence, the choice of Strasbourg for holding our meeting was an excellent one… Because it was here that Rouget de Lisle composed the beautiful hymn “La Marseillaise.”

The Russian Revolution of October 1917 was also a great revolution because it proposed the setting up of the International Front of Workers: “Workers of the world, unite!” This revolution vouches for the fact that this was possible, although not immediately, at least soon. As Lenin said, the revolution that started in Russia, described as the “weak link” in the system of that era, was to be followed within a short historical period by revolutions throughout Europe, especially in Germany. It was not by chance that this did not happen, since the proletarian internationalism was not yet on the agenda of the immediate future. It nonetheless remained necessary and possible in the future.

The Chinese Revolution was also a great revolution because it proposed to associate national liberation from imperialist domination with radical social transformation capable of bringing together all the peoples of what are now called the countries of the South, meaning those of Asia, Africa and Latin America. The Chinese Revolution was indeed followed by the beginning of the renaissance of the peoples of the South. I am referring here to the Bandung Conference (1955) and the Non-Aligned Movement that followed. This was, however, only a limited and fragile beginning. Associating liberation from the yoke of imperialism with the determined commitment to the road of socialist construction has not yet been understood as an unavoidable necessity.

Such are the reasons for these three revolutions being great revolutions. It was because they were ahead of their time that the Russian and Chinese revolutions were immediately confronted with two huge challenges.

The first of these challenges has been the continual bellicose and barbarous hostility of the so-called civilized West, meaning the ruling classes of the capitalist and imperialist West. For the Cold War was not a late phenomenon coming after the Second World War. Hot and Cold Wars against the Soviet Union have never ceased from 1917 to the present day: the 1917–1920 wars of intervention, the first long cold war up to 1941, the second hot war—the Second World War, and then the renewal of the cold war that followed. The Soviets have faced this challenge with the adoption of accelerated industrial construction and armament. I believe we should be grateful to them, as it was because of the Red Army that the Nazis were defeated.

China found itself in a situation enabling the country to face up to the same challenge, that of hostile imperialism, but in a different way. It has chosen the path of active participation in globalization, and in this context, has implemented systematic policies with a view to transforming this globalization, which by its very nature is capitalist and imperialist, into a new form of “globalization without hegemony.” We will surely discuss this in our debates.

The second challenge the two great revolutions have been confronted with is that of engaging upon the social transformation of the overwhelming majority of rural dwellers. The question is how to associate this rural majority with a revolution that is not a bourgeois democratic revolution but a people's democratic revolution, which is very different. The challenge is to associate them in a transformation that enables progress in the construction of unity among workers from all over the world, and unity among all peoples in the world.

I will conclude on this note. Since we are invited to propose a Manifesto for the twenty-first century, I suggest that our objective should be the setting up of a peoples' and workers' Internationale. This is what we need. For this, we must go beyond the formulas inaugurated under the name of “social forums,” which are merely spaces for debate. Although useful, these are not enough. Beyond this, it is necessary to initiate forms of organization that enable workers and peoples from all over the planet to coordinate their striving strategies for struggle, to move on from defensive strategies, leaving the initiative to the dominant imperialist and capitalist power, to an offensive strategy that would force the opponent to be on the defensive and to respond to our initiatives, those of the workers and peoples.

While this call may seem utopian today, and it undoubtedly will, it should become a reality quite soon.